Football Bank Builder – First Impressions & Week 1 Report :)

Posted by on November 10, 2013

Hi there, Paulo here with the first report on my brand new trial of …. Football Bank Builder!

(And if you’ve never heard of Football Bank Builder, you may like to read Lucy’s introductory remarks about it before returning here).

Football Bank Builder

Football Bank Builder

 

I was in fact meaning only to do my first report after one month, but as I was so kindly asked by Lucy, how could I refuse?!

(By the way… my arm still aches!! >:(  ).

And this trial certainly looks an interesting exercise!

After just one week, we don’t yet have much data to work with. In fact, we’ve just reached 20 bets so far. Which is more or less what is to be expected each week, if we follow the system’s recommendations!

As I said in my comment on the opening post, I’m working with three separate banks for three staking plans: one starting at 20 units, and two of 176 units each! Not 352 units as I said there… that was my mistake, as this comes to 372 units.. But the FBB manual recommends £352 for a minimum starting bank, which equates to 176 units of £2, obviously.

So, Is Football Bank Builder Easy To Use?

So far, selections have proved to be quick and easy to find! And with rules as simple as these, there is no room for subjectivity! Either a game is eligible.. or it is not!

However, things become a bit more complicated if you are not able to monitor the odds closer to the off. They can have quite significant movements which can lead to a match becoming not eligible for the system.

Another point to make is: As we operate two recovery staking plans, a match must come to an end before we can bet in the next one. Unless, our bet is already closed during the game. Which, as it happens, is a pretty frequent event!

Football Bank Builder proposes a solution for this. However, for the purpose of our trial, I’ll stick to the simpler solution and just place bets after knowing the previous one result!

Of course, on days with fewer football games to search through, it may be difficult to find three of them between the boundaries of the system’s criteria that don’t overlap in time. That’s why there are days with just one or two bets.

So, what about the results?! What have we found so far?

Well… Surprisingly, things started nicely with two wins! But then, just when I though Football Bank Builder had escaped Lucy’s New Triallist’s Curse, we had six losses in a run! Just to test our stomach, of course! And the recovery plans… those too…

Which was a bit scary, I can tell you, seeing those bets escalating at an alarming rate. :-(

But one must trust a system designer who has already proved himself in the past. And things eventually came to our side. Thanks to Mr. Kayabasi, who scored for Balikesirspor right before half-time!

Yes, we also bet on those games between teams whose names one cannot spell correctly! After all, they are not on the exempt list from Football Bank Builder, are they?! :)

Since then, there have been no more loooooong losing runs, But no winning runs either.

That’s why our strike rate looks so miserable right now!…  After 20 bets we won 7! Just 35%!! :-(

Which of course is not good for our flat stakes bank!

And we need a strike rate of 47% to make a small profit if the average odds of our bets are 1.82 (as claimed by the system’s author). We have achieved a slightly lower odds average, but with a not yet significant number of bets.

The good news is: Even with such a lousy strike rate, our Fibonacci and 2 Steps Back banks are holding up firmly! But thats what they were devised for… right? :)

Football Bank Builder                
DD/ MM Odd Stake At Risk Res Profit Live bank Stake At Risk Profit Live bank Stake At Risk Profit Live bank
            Units       Units       Units
    Flat Stakes Fibonacci 2 steps back
            20.0       176.0       176.0
02/11 1.73 1.00 -0.73 win 0.95 21.0 1.00 -0.73 0.95 177.0 1.00 -0.73 0.95 177.0
1.71 1.00 -0.71 win 0.95 21.9 1.00 -0.71 0.95 177.9 1.00 -0.71 0.95 177.9
03/11 1.93 1.00 -0.93 lose -0.93 21.0 1.00 -0.93 -0.93 177.0 1.00 -0.93 -0.93 177.0
1.68 1.00 -0.68 lose -0.68 20.3 1.00 -0.68 -0.68 176.3 1.00 -0.68 -0.68 176.3
1.89 1.00 -0.89 lose -0.89 19.4 2.00 -1.78 -1.78 174.5 2.00 -1.78 -1.78 174.5
04/11 1.77 1.00 -0.77 lose -0.77 18.6 3.00 -2.31 -2.31 172.2 3.00 -2.31 -2.31 172.2
1.69 1.00 -0.69 lose -0.69 17.9 5.00 -3.45 -3.45 168.8 5.00 -3.45 -3.45 168.8
05/11 1.67 1.00 -0.67 lose -0.67 17.3 8.00 -5.36 -5.36 163.4 8.00 -5.36 -5.36 163.4
06/11 1.67 1.00 -0.67 win 0.95 18.2 13.00 -8.71 12.35 175.7 13.00 -8.71 12.35 175.7
1.72 1.00 -0.72 lose -0.72 17.5 1.00 -0.72 -0.72 175.0 5.00 -3.60 -3.60 172.1
1.64 1.00 -0.64 lose -0.64 16.9 1.00 -0.64 -0.64 174.4 8.00 -5.12 -5.12 167.0
07/11 1.76 1.00 -0.76 win 0.95 17.8 2.00 -1.52 1.90 176.3 13.00 -9.88 12.35 179.4
1.72 1.00 -0.72 lose -0.72 17.1 1.00 -0.72 -0.72 175.6 5.00 -3.60 -3.60 175.8
1.80 1.00 -0.80 lose -0.80 16.3 1.00 -0.80 -0.80 174.8 8.00 -6.40 -6.40 169.4
08/11 1.74 1.00 -0.74 lose -0.74 15.6 2.00 -1.48 -1.48 173.3 13.00 -9.62 -9.62 159.8
09/11 1.72 1.00 -0.72 win 0.95 16.5 3.00 -2.16 2.85 176.1 21.00 -15.12 19.95 179.7
1.78 1.00 -0.78 lose -0.78 15.7 1.00 -0.78 -0.78 175.4 8.00 -6.24 -6.24 173.5
1.70 1.00 -0.70 lose -0.70 15.0 1.00 -0.70 -0.70 174.7 13.00 -9.10 -9.10 164.4
1.88 1.00 -0.88 win 0.95 16.0 2.00 -1.76 1.90 176.6 21.00 -18.48 19.95 184.3
10/11 1.78 1.00 -0.78 win 0.95 16.9 1.00 -0.78 0.95 177.5 8.00 -6.24 7.60 191.9
             
                             
          Profit -3.1     Profit 1.5     Profit 15.9
          New Balance 16.9     New Balance 177.5     New Balance 191.9
          %age Bank Growth -15%     %age Bank Growth 1%     %age Bank Growth 9%
          Average Price 1.7                
          No of bets placed 20.0                
          Strike rate 0.4                
          Avg. price of Winners 1.8                

Summary

Overall, the three banks have us 14 units up!! Which is much better than I expected, considering that I believe the strike rate will eventually improve to over 40% for sure!

And summarizing our first week, we had 20 bets, winning 7 of them!

We had a loss of -3.08 units at flat stakes (bank lost 15.4%), but a profit of 1.5 units using the Fibonacci staking plan (bank up 0.85%), and a very nice profit of 15.91 units using the “2 steps back” staking plan (bank up 9.04%)!

In total, we had a profit of 14.33 units and a global bank winning 3.85%.

Not bad for one week, uh?

Now, if only it keeps this way from now on… ;)

And that’s it for today!

I’ll be back early in December with my next report on Football Bank Builder. If I manage to keep my arms out of danger, that is… :-P

Paulo.

ps why not download Lucy’s free FORTY-THREE PAGE ebook on making £1000 per month from betting systems? The methods are straightforward and easy to implement, so click here now and get it instantly!

4 Responses to Football Bank Builder – First Impressions & Week 1 Report :)

  1. Karel

    Well, I’m curious… From reading their “sales pitch” I’m left wondering about a few things.

    Most importantly, and surprisingly, they state that “my Football Bankbuilder© laying project DOESN’T NEED value to make a profit for you.”

    But is that even possible? I don’t think so. No expected value should mean no expected profits, regardless of the staking. (Or does the staking amount to some softer version of Martingale? I’m not familiar with Fibonacci etc.)

    They actually go on to state that “[i]t’s all in the staking plan and the prices you lay at” – and the mentioning of “the prices you lay at” does suggest that value is critical after all, but then why do they state it isn’t?

    Also I note that they talk about “turn[ing] £1,000 into £3,138.43 in 12-months and into an
    amazing £30,912.68 in just 36-months”, “[a]ll from a tiny 2 points profit a month!”. This seems a little bit misleading in that the “tiny 2 points profits” actually turns about to be a not-so-tiny 10% monthly profit. The numbers are correct of course if the starting bank amounts to only 20 points, but a bank of just 20 points is probably not what people have in mind when reading about “a tiny 2 points profits”.

    But anyway, I’m still curious as to what the trial will bring…

    Best regards,
    Karel.

    • Paulo

      Karel,
      I agree with you on that. The claim of “no need of value” is obviously wrong, in my opinion!
      However, maybe the “value” is already contained in the odds we seek for!
      The market is not perfect. And I assume it has a consistent “bias”, which leads to the “value” we need in the long term. At least I expect so! :-)
      Why do they state it in that wording… beats me! But it is a sales page after all, right? ;-)

      Same goes about those “tiny 2 points”. But in that case, to be fair, they say right away that it represents 10%.
      So, no misleading here.
      My opinion, that’s all… Not defending any point of view other than what I could form, based on what I read.

  2. Dave

    The staking for the 2-steps-back plan is a red flag for me. Even though that’s the plan that has kept the overall trial in profit this week – the % of the bank risked towards to the end of the week is high, and on a bet that is still odds-on.

    These bets are independent to each other and just because the previous x bets lost, it makes absolutely no difference to the probability of the next bet winning, and this would therefore highlight a dangerous flaw in loss-recovery systems such as this one.

    I note the next stake was to be 13pts – another couple of losses at this stage would be pretty damning for this system…

  3. Andrew D

    @Dave,
    Andrew here co-author of FBB.
    All staking systems contain a level of risk. I’ve seen systems/services who recommend 200 point banks and advise level stakes and even they have lost their banks!
    I agree all bets are independant of each other but when married with the stated historical strike rate that FBB has proven to obtain overtime then certain loss recovery systems can be sensibly adopted in line with good money management. The idea of the staking plan is not necesarily to obtain a profit the higher you go up the sequence, but its to claw most, if not all of the previous losses incurred so you are then in a position to take advantage of the winning streaks we often have that will drive you straight into profit without having to recoup large previous losses. FBB is laying, not backing, and the betting bank advised can take over 2 and a 1/2 losing sequences, and even then if we do get a losing sequence you don’t lose your full sequence bank, as on average we are laying below our unit stake. Its all about getting the odds in your favour from the filters in place, then over time you can build enough bank to absorb the losing sequences as and when they happen. If users find they get nervy when going up the staking sequence that would indicate they have set their starting bank too high from the start. I always advise users to start with a betting bank they are very comfortable with in order they keep going to reap the benefits. Shares go up as well as down as they say, gambling is no different in my opinion, the idea is to have a sound method based on very accurate historical data that even if & when poor periods are encountered there is enough bank to absorb these periods knowing we have the stats and odds in our favour to arrive at eventual profit. So i think the risk/reward is about right for FBB as we dont promise huge profits but at the same time our liability is always below our unit stake, then over time profits can build in line with bank, hence the name ‘Football Bankbuilder’.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>